Talk:Arthur McDuffie
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page. | ||
| Start | This article has been rated as start-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ] | ||
 |
This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Florida; If you would like to join us, please visit the project page; if you have any questions, please consult the FAQ. | ||||||
| Start | This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale (If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.) | ||||||
| Mid | This article has been rated as a Mid priority article | ||||||
|
|||||||
 |
This article is part of WikiProject Miami, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to South Florida on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. | |
| Start | This article has been rated as start-Class on the assessment scale. | |
| High | This article has been rated as high-importance on the assessment scale. |
Not that I'm saying the story is wrong, but is there actual evidence that the police lied? Granted it's likely that it was they who beat him into a coma, but isn't Wikipedia supposed to be neutral all the same?
- While I know nothing about this incident, the above unsigned comment seems reasonable to me -- the article says the officer were found not guilty. Is it fair for the article to also say they "lied"? SteveHopson 02:21, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
Parks, Arva Moore. Miami: The Magic City. Miami, Fl: Centennial Press, 1991. ISBN 0962940224 and the Miami Herald archives are the refs, not explained in detail, the offisers lied in court but it was a whole white jury and they were found not gulity, not PoV, thanks Jaranda wat's sup 02:23, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
- In that case, I think the article should be better documented. As is, the only documentation is an Op-Ed, not a news article. SteveHopson 02:30, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
The article should be better documented, its very opinionated and comes from a reporter, so the reporter is going to describe only his or her side. There are always two-sides to every story and both of those sides should be listed or the article, as Steven Hopson put it, should stay neutral. If it doesnt then the respect that wikipedia has gained will be lost. Daniel
Most of the article seems to be lifted directly from the Op-Ed listed as a citation. Considering that "Op-Ed" is by definition an opinion and not neutral, the article itself clearly also isn't neutral.07:30, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
You are right. Defendants are considered innocent until proven guilty. Basic rule of all civilised law structures. If they are proven innocent and leave the court as free men, they are twice as innocent. Sorry. Sorry.
This may be semantics, but a verdict of "not guilty" is not really the same as innocent. It can simply mean that the prosecution did not meet the burden of proof since the defense does not have to prove innocence but merely raise "reasonable doubt" or perhaps play on the prejudices of the jury. Although someone found innocent cannot be tried for the same offense again, then can be found civilly liable for the same act. For example, O.J. Simpson could be sued for wrongful death of his ex-wife even though he was found not guilty. Wschart 13:17, 23 May 2006 (UTC) Now, this may be right. We will see. As soon as these sleuths are charged with - dunno - manslaughter and found civilly liable for what they had allegedly done, they will be thought of as "not innocent" and "guilty". Again, until then, they must be considered innocent. Anything else is violation of the law :)
Contents |
[edit] Number of children
From this article, "McDuffie was an insurance salesman who had previously been a United States Marine, and a military police officer. He had two daughters and planned to remarry his former wife at the time of the incident."
The Liberty City riots article says this "McDuffie, who had been scheduled to be remarried to his ex-wife two months before his death, was the father of three small children. Of that amount, the family's legal team received $483,833, while McDuffie's children each received $202,500, and his mother, $67,500."
So can this article be updated to reflect the fact that he had three children if that is indeed the case? By someone who has read the source material and knows how many children he had preferably. I think this language is suitable... "He had three children and planned to remarry his former wife at the time of the incident." 12.215.36.208 15:55, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
- I imagine it means that at the time, he had two children, but after his death he had three because perhaps his girlfriend was pregnant at the time. Cyborg Ninja 00:12, 28 Nov 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Wrong Michael Watts
Article was linking to the wrong Michael Watts. Have changed to stop-gap solution until someone who knows more can add a disambig. page to Michael Watts, or change the link in this article. Easy skankin' 10:44, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Separate article
Liberty City Riots should be a separate article... AnonMoos (talk) 15:42, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] POV Check
I've flagged this article for a POV check, because it seems to me that it's not written neutrally at all. It's full of commentary such as "Del Toro's arrest demonstrates the desperation of the state and the pressure of the media to receive results, when Judge Lenor Nesbit rendered a directed verdict releasing Del Toro half way through the trial," as well as unbacked assertions such as "Thus, Marrero's testimony proved to the jury that their was mounting reasonable doubts from all angles of the state case." Yes, the jury found Marrero innocent, but there's no evidence that it was because they felt Marrero's testimony proved the existence of reasonable doubt. Phanatic (talk) 20:03, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
